Critical Studies in Diversity Management Literature

Abstract

SpringerBriefs present concise summaries of cutting-edge research and practical applications across a wide spectrum of fields. Featuring compact volumes of 50 to 125 pages, the series covers a range of content from professional to academic. Typical topics might include:• A timely report of state-of-the-art analytical techniques • A bridge between new research results as published in journal articles and a contextual literature review • A snapshot of a hot or emerging topic • An in-depth case study or clinical example • A presentation of core concepts that readers must understand to make independent contributions SpringerBriefs in Psychology showcase emerging theory, empirical research, and practical application in a wide variety of topics in psychology and related fields.Briefs are characterized by fast, global electronic dissemination, standard publishing contracts, standardized manuscript preparation and formatting guidelines, and expedited production schedulesMore information about this series at

Putting diversity to work

“…Studying change efforts in CopCorp uncovers how diversity initiatives are embedded in the organizational setting and draws on societal discourses on difference. These findings emphasize the benefits of an organizational-level study in contrast to current diversity research predominantly grounded in de-contextualized, generalized and abstract studies (Jonsen et al, 2011;Ghorashi and Sabelis, 2013;Gotsis and Kortezi, 2014;Zanoni et al, 2010). This situated study demonstrates how the prevalence of generalized and de-contextualized research fail to assess and hence redress the often tacit, organizational 'underbelly' of power battles related to privilege, disadvantage and resistance.…”

“…In contrast, critical diversity research has applied a more discursive and political lens, aimed at exposing how larger societal discourses regarding, for example, gender, sexuality or race/ethnicity obstruct diversity initiatives (cf., Oswick and Noon, 2014;Zanoni et al, 2010). Here, diversity management is deconstructed as being a normative, utilitarian and managerial rhetoric, serving in the upkeep of inequality (cf., Ahmed, 2007;Gotsis and Kortezi, 2014). Critical diversity scholars play a vital role in documenting the persistence of organizational inequality.…”

“…On the one hand, diversity management scholars promote generalized and de-politicized activities which in practice show a variation in terms of the extent to which they incorporate the promised forms of inclusiveness (cf., Dobbin et al, 2011;Jonsen et al, 2011). On the other, critical diversity scholars focus on minority experiences of discrimination and inequality in the context of historical and societal influences (cf., Gotsis and Kortezi, 2014;Van Laer and Janssens, 2011). This predominance of generalized and decontextualized diversity research has left the organizational level largely unexplored (cf., Zanoni et al, 2010).…”

Exploring the Framing of Diversity Rhetoric in “Top-Rated in Diversity” Organizations

“…From an organizational perspective, there is similar ambiguity in how companies prescribe and interpret the term: According to a recent report from the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), although organizations collectively believe that diversity has merit in the workplace, only 30% have an agreed-upon definition of diversity (SHRM, 2007). In addition, Gotsis and Kortezi (2014) note, “the term carries multiple, overlapping and often conflicting meanings (Hays-Thomas, 2004; Prasad & Mills, 1997)” via a socially-constructed framework.…”

Managing protean diversity

“…However, often coming from the political–ideological focus of critical theory or similar (e.g. Fournier and Grey, 2000), such context-sensitive approaches to managing diversity tend to focus on historical, cross-cultural, and societal influences (Gotsis and Kortesi, 2014). Although relevant and important, such a strong focus on external influences has left the organizational level largely unexplored by critical scholars in CCM and DM (Jonsen et al, 2011)—also the relationship between organizational matters and broader layers of influence.…”